Talk:Carlos Quinones (Dakotaverse)
Downgrading Fade is a perfectly valid well-developed major character, with a large number of appearances. There's no reason to downgrade him temporarily just because at the moment, despite having pretty much everything else filled out we're missing his history. That's what the History Needed template is for. I fail to see any situation in which this kind of downgrading would be helpful or of any good use. :- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 09:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :"At the moment"? Unfortunately, this article is typical of a growing tendency to create articles that don't tell us jack-sh!t about the character. Given the amount of info in his article, there is no reason to believe he's anything other than a minor character. The fact that nobody has added anything says quite a bit about his relative status in the DCU. Your words about an edit war ring hollow when you're the one reverting my edits in article after article. Perhaps you're too close to this one? The Paradox 09:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC) ::I said we should avoid having an edit war. I will agree that he is not a particularly important character relative to the DCU, but that's because he's a Milestone character. And up until a month or two ago, our entire database pretty much ignored Milestone in its entirety. There's not much historical information here because there are very few people actively editing our Dakota content. I am not done reading the adventures of Fade, as chronicled in but not limited to Blood Syndicate #1-35, and it is a lot of work attempting to populate an entire universe worth of characters entirely from scratch. I will write this up, I just need to finish reading the content first, and there's a lot of it. In the meantime, please don't downgrade the template from what it should be for aesthetic reasons. :::- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 10:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC) :::You wrote that an edit war should be avoided as you were reverting my edits for the '''third' time,'' and before anybody even had a chance to reply to the talk page. Waaaay too late and totally wrong approach. That's like saying we should refrain from violence as I lay bleeding around the knife you just stuck in my gut. :::I based my downgrade on the information currently in the article, not some theoretical "might someday happen" speculation about somebody's potential contributions. So far, you're the only one to do anything other than maintenance edits to virtually all the Milestone. So what if you have a stroke tomorrow? Should we wait for your rehab to finish? As my edit summary said, feel free to upgrade it when the information is made available to the rest of us. :::Aesthetics is a vital part of this site - from the images to the layout to the categories, how it looks is of great interest to everybody. If that weren't the case we'd have blocks of text with no formatting, no images, just straight information. You're request that aesthetics be ignored is contrary to one of the core principles that underlies the very existence of this site. The Paradox 11:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)